TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 275
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hether the Tribunal is correct in holding that the voluntary statement deposed under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 with respect to acceptance of values, cannot be the basis for enhancing the values in the light of the settled law in the case of Surjeet Singh Chhabra Vs. Union of India (1997 (89) ELT 646 S(SC) ) ? 2. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in granting the relief beyond the terms of the prayer of the respondent in as much as the importer had agreed enhancement to 50% and 25% of the value for calculators with cartons and without cartons respectively and by setting aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and directing the proper officer of the appellant to complete assessment of the goods on the basis of the decl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....annon (India) Limited, Malaysia, which could not be taken as the basis for valuation, since the quotation was from Malaysia and the country of origin of the goods was Hong Kong. The Adjudicating Authority further pointed out that in any event, the assessee did not produce any corroborative evidence. Thus, having noted all the above facts on the valuation and misdeclaration, and quantity, the Adjudicating Authority rejected the value declared by the assessee and determined the value under Rule 8 of the CVR'88 Rules based on the importer's voluntary submission for enhancement as per his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. Thus, while revising the value, the Adjudicating Authority proposed penal action on the assessee. 4. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....learned Standing counsel appearing for the Revenue reiterated the view on the aspect of misdeclaration, on the valuation of the items imported and the description, yet, when the Adjudicating Authority, himself had given up the case on misdeclaration, the one and only question that now survives for consideration is in the context of the assessee itself agreeing for enhancement of the value, whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing the Adjudicating Authority to complete the assessment based on the value declared based on the quotation received from M/s.Cannon (India) Ltd., Malaysia. 7. Admittedly, the Revenue found that the quotation from Cannon (India) Limited could not be a proper base for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aken by the assessee. It may also be noted that the assessee himself gave an undertaking that he would produce the manufacturer's invoice. However, before the Adjudicating Authority, no corroborative material or evidence was placed to substantiate the stand that the value given was based on the documents filed before the Officer. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the import was made from the trader and hence, it would be difficult for getting the manufacturer's invoice. 10. We do not accept such contention of the assessee on its face value considering the fact that it was always open to the assessee to produce such contemporaneous records certified from the Foreign Supplier to substantiate the value declared by the importer....